llvm dev - Apr 2020 - RFC: Switching from Bugzilla to Github Issues [UPDATED]

In a previous discussion, one other suggestion had been to migrate all the
bugzilla bugs to a separate initially-private "bug archive" repository
in
github. This has a few benefits:
1. If the migration is messed up, the repo can be deleted, and the process
run again, until we get a result we like.
2. The numbering can be fully-controlled.
Once the bugs are migrated to *some* github repository, individual issues
can then be "moved" between repositories, and github will redirect
from the
movefrom-repository's bug to the target repository's bug.

We could also just have llvm.org/PR### be the url only for legacy bugzilla
issue numbers -- and have it use a file listing the mappings of bugzilla id
-> github id to generate the redirects. (GCC just did this recently for svn
revision number redirections,
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2020-April/232030.html).

Then we could introduce a new naming scheme for github issue shortlinks.

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 3:50 PM Richard Smith via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 12:31, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I wanted to continue discussing the plan to migrate from Bugzilla to
>> Github.
>> It was suggested that I start a new thread and give a summary of the
>> proposal
>> and what has changed since it was originally proposed in October.
>>
>> == Here is the original proposal:
>>
>> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-October/136162.html
>>
>> == What has changed:
>>
>> * You will be able to subscribe to notifications for a specific issue
>>   labels.  We have a proof of concept notification system using github
>> actions
>>   that will be used for this.
>>
>> * Emails will be sent to llvm-bugs when issues are opened or closed.
>>
>> * We have the initial list of labels:
>> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/labels
>>
>> == Remaining issue:
>>
>> * There is one remaining issue that I don't feel we have consensus
on,
>> and that is what to do with bugs in the existing bugzilla.  Here are
some
>> options
>> that we have discussed:
>>
>> 1. Switch to GitHub issues for new bugs only.  Bugs filed in bugzilla
>> that are
>> still active will be updated there until they are closed.  This means
>> that over
>> time the number of active bugs in bugzilla will slowly decrease as bugs
>> are closed
>> out.  Then at some point in the future, all of the bugs from bugzilla
>> will be archived
>> into their own GitHub repository that is separate from the llvm-project
>> repo.
>>
>> 2. Same as 1, but also create a migration script that would allow
anyone
>> to
>> manually migrate an active bug from bugzilla to a GitHub issue in the
>> llvm-project
>> repo.  The intention with this script is that it would be used to
migrate
>> high-traffic
>> or important bugs from bugzilla to GitHub to help increase the
visibility
>> of the bug.
>> This would not be used for mass migration of all the bugs.
>>
>> 3. Do a mass bug migration from bugzilla to GitHub and enable GitHub
>> issues at the same time.
>> Closed or inactive bugs would be archived into their own GitHub
>> repository, and active bugs
>> would be migrated to the llvm-project repo.
>>
>
> Can we preserve the existing bug numbers if we migrate this way? There are
> lots of references to "PRxxxxx" in checked in LLVM artifacts and
elsewhere
> in the world, as well as links to llvm.org/PRxxxxx, and if we can
> preserve all the issue numbers this would ease the transition pain
> substantially.
>
>
>> The key difference between proposal 1,2 and 3, is when bugs will be
>> archived from bugzilla
>> to GitHub.  Delaying the archiving of bugs (proposals 1 and 2) means
that
>> we can migrate
>> to GitHub issues sooner (within 1-2 weeks), whereas trying to archive
>> bugs during the
>> transition (proposal 3) will delay the transition for a while (likely
>> several months)
>> while we evaluate the various solutions for moving bugs from bugzilla
to
>> GitHub.
>>
>>
>> The original proposal was to do 1 or 2, however there were some
concerns
>> raised on the list
>> that having 2 different places to search for bugs for some period of
time
>> would
>> be very inconvenient.  So, I would like to restart this discussion and
>> hopefully we can
>> come to some kind of conclusion about the best way forward.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tom
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200420/5f3173bf/attachment-0001.html>

On 04/20/2020 04:08 PM, James Y Knight wrote:
> In a previous discussion, one other suggestion had been to migrate all the
bugzilla bugs to a separate initially-private "bug archive" repository
in github. This has a few benefits:
> 1. If the migration is messed up, the repo can be deleted, and the process
run again, until we get a result we like.
> 2. The numbering can be fully-controlled.
> Once the bugs are migrated to /some/ github repository, individual issues
can then be "moved" between repositories, and github will redirect
from the movefrom-repository's bug to the target repository's bug.
> 
This seems like a good approach to me.
> We could also just have llvm.org/PR### <http://llvm.org/PR###> be the
url only for legacy bugzilla issue numbers -- and have it use a file listing the
mappings of bugzilla id -> github id to generate the redirects. (GCC just did
this recently for svn revision number redirections,
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2020-April/232030.html).
> 
Would we even need a mapping file for this if we are able to get bugzilla id N
to be archived to GitHub issue id N?

-Tom
> Then we could introduce a new naming scheme for github issue shortlinks.
> 
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 3:50 PM Richard Smith via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
> 
>     On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 12:31, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
> 
>         Hi,
> 
>         I wanted to continue discussing the plan to migrate from Bugzilla
to Github.
>         It was suggested that I start a new thread and give a summary of
the proposal
>         and what has changed since it was originally proposed in October.
> 
>         == Here is the original proposal:
> 
>         http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-October/136162.html
> 
>         == What has changed:
> 
>         * You will be able to subscribe to notifications for a specific
issue
>           labels.  We have a proof of concept notification system using
github actions
>           that will be used for this.
> 
>         * Emails will be sent to llvm-bugs when issues are opened or
closed.
> 
>         * We have the initial list of labels:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/labels
> 
>         == Remaining issue:
> 
>         * There is one remaining issue that I don't feel we have
consensus on,
>         and that is what to do with bugs in the existing bugzilla.  Here
are some options
>         that we have discussed:
> 
>         1. Switch to GitHub issues for new bugs only.  Bugs filed in
bugzilla that are
>         still active will be updated there until they are closed.  This
means that over
>         time the number of active bugs in bugzilla will slowly decrease as
bugs are closed
>         out.  Then at some point in the future, all of the bugs from
bugzilla will be archived
>         into their own GitHub repository that is separate from the
llvm-project repo.
> 
>         2. Same as 1, but also create a migration script that would allow
anyone to
>         manually migrate an active bug from bugzilla to a GitHub issue in
the llvm-project
>         repo.  The intention with this script is that it would be used to
migrate high-traffic
>         or important bugs from bugzilla to GitHub to help increase the
visibility of the bug.
>         This would not be used for mass migration of all the bugs.
> 
>         3. Do a mass bug migration from bugzilla to GitHub and enable
GitHub issues at the same time.
>         Closed or inactive bugs would be archived into their own GitHub
repository, and active bugs
>         would be migrated to the llvm-project repo.
> 
> 
>     Can we preserve the existing bug numbers if we migrate this way? There
are lots of references to "PRxxxxx" in checked in LLVM artifacts and
elsewhere in the world, as well as links to llvm.org/PRxxxxx
<http://llvm.org/PRxxxxx>, and if we can preserve all the issue numbers
this would ease the transition pain substantially.
>      
> 
>         The key difference between proposal 1,2 and 3, is when bugs will be
archived from bugzilla
>         to GitHub.  Delaying the archiving of bugs (proposals 1 and 2)
means that we can migrate
>         to GitHub issues sooner (within 1-2 weeks), whereas trying to
archive bugs during the
>         transition (proposal 3) will delay the transition for a while
(likely several months)
>         while we evaluate the various solutions for moving bugs from
bugzilla to GitHub.
> 
> 
>         The original proposal was to do 1 or 2, however there were some
concerns raised on the list
>         that having 2 different places to search for bugs for some period
of time would
>         be very inconvenient.  So, I would like to restart this discussion
and hopefully we can
>         come to some kind of conclusion about the best way forward.
> 
>         Thanks,
>         Tom
> 
>         _______________________________________________
>         LLVM Developers mailing list
>         llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org>
>         https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     LLVM Developers mailing list
>     llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>     https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>

> On 04/20/2020 04:08 PM, James Y Knight wrote:
> > In a previous discussion, one other suggestion had been to migrate all
the bugzilla bugs to a separate initially-private "bug archive"
repository in github. This has a few benefits:
> > 1. If the migration is messed up, the repo can be deleted, and the
process run again, until we get a result we like.
> > 2. The numbering can be fully-controlled.
> > Once the bugs are migrated to /some/ github repository, individual
issues can then be "moved" between repositories, and github will
redirect from the movefrom-repository's bug to the target repository's
bug.
> This seems like a good approach to me.
This might work, yes.

There are some limitations as well, this is why I'm very cautious
here. See
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1byEcbsxF3pL-HGGd_K6axdh87tbcsuJK3Dp6ThxGjKA/edit
for some list.
>
> > We could also just have llvm.org/PR### <http://llvm.org/PR###>
be the url only for legacy bugzilla issue numbers -- and have it use a file
listing the mappings of bugzilla id -> github id to generate the redirects.
(GCC just did this recently for svn revision number redirections,
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2020-April/232030.html).
> >
>
> Would we even need a mapping file for this if we are able to get bugzilla
id N
> to be archived to GitHub issue id N?
>
> -Tom
>
> > Then we could introduce a new naming scheme for github issue
shortlinks.
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 3:50 PM Richard Smith via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>>
wrote:
> >
> >     On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 12:31, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>>
wrote:
> >
> >         Hi,
> >
> >         I wanted to continue discussing the plan to migrate from
Bugzilla to Github.
> >         It was suggested that I start a new thread and give a summary
of the proposal
> >         and what has changed since it was originally proposed in
October.
> >
> >         == Here is the original proposal:
> >
> >        
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-October/136162.html
> >
> >         == What has changed:
> >
> >         * You will be able to subscribe to notifications for a
specific issue
> >           labels.  We have a proof of concept notification system
using github actions
> >           that will be used for this.
> >
> >         * Emails will be sent to llvm-bugs when issues are opened or
closed.
> >
> >         * We have the initial list of labels:
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/labels
> >
> >         == Remaining issue:
> >
> >         * There is one remaining issue that I don't feel we have
consensus on,
> >         and that is what to do with bugs in the existing bugzilla. 
Here are some options
> >         that we have discussed:
> >
> >         1. Switch to GitHub issues for new bugs only.  Bugs filed in
bugzilla that are
> >         still active will be updated there until they are closed. 
This means that over
> >         time the number of active bugs in bugzilla will slowly
decrease as bugs are closed
> >         out.  Then at some point in the future, all of the bugs from
bugzilla will be archived
> >         into their own GitHub repository that is separate from the
llvm-project repo.
> >
> >         2. Same as 1, but also create a migration script that would
allow anyone to
> >         manually migrate an active bug from bugzilla to a GitHub issue
in the llvm-project
> >         repo.  The intention with this script is that it would be used
to migrate high-traffic
> >         or important bugs from bugzilla to GitHub to help increase the
visibility of the bug.
> >         This would not be used for mass migration of all the bugs.
> >
> >         3. Do a mass bug migration from bugzilla to GitHub and enable
GitHub issues at the same time.
> >         Closed or inactive bugs would be archived into their own
GitHub repository, and active bugs
> >         would be migrated to the llvm-project repo.
> >
> >
> >     Can we preserve the existing bug numbers if we migrate this way?
There are lots of references to "PRxxxxx" in checked in LLVM artifacts
and elsewhere in the world, as well as links to llvm.org/PRxxxxx
<http://llvm.org/PRxxxxx>, and if we can preserve all the issue numbers
this would ease the transition pain substantially.
> >
> >
> >         The key difference between proposal 1,2 and 3, is when bugs
will be archived from bugzilla
> >         to GitHub.  Delaying the archiving of bugs (proposals 1 and 2)
means that we can migrate
> >         to GitHub issues sooner (within 1-2 weeks), whereas trying to
archive bugs during the
> >         transition (proposal 3) will delay the transition for a while
(likely several months)
> >         while we evaluate the various solutions for moving bugs from
bugzilla to GitHub.
> >
> >
> >         The original proposal was to do 1 or 2, however there were
some concerns raised on the list
> >         that having 2 different places to search for bugs for some
period of time would
> >         be very inconvenient.  So, I would like to restart this
discussion and hopefully we can
> >         come to some kind of conclusion about the best way forward.
> >
> >         Thanks,
> >         Tom
> >
> >         _______________________________________________
> >         LLVM Developers mailing list
> >         llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org>
> >         https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> >
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     LLVM Developers mailing list
> >     llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org>
> >     https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev


-- 
With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
Department of Statistical Modelling, Saint Petersburg State University

All things being equal, I'd prefer Richard Smith's proposal that
doesn't
involve needing a new/old numbering scheme, but lets us keep a single
numbering/redirection (& I doubt we need the first 200 bugs in any case -
has anyone referred to bugs that early in the last 5 years, say? But
wouldn't mind if they were copied in with different numbers/some kind of
redirection (but hey, if we can rewrite bug contents - we could always move
the existing 200 bugs (but I guess some are pull requests and we can't
totally rewrite those into bugs?) up into the new numbering range once the
necessary numbers are reserved)).

But I understand the single numbering preserving option is likely more
complicated/costly & thus not an equal candidate - just my minor preference.

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 9:58 PM Tom Stellard via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On 04/20/2020 04:08 PM, James Y Knight wrote:
> > In a previous discussion, one other suggestion had been to migrate all
> the bugzilla bugs to a separate initially-private "bug archive"
repository
> in github. This has a few benefits:
> > 1. If the migration is messed up, the repo can be deleted, and the
> process run again, until we get a result we like.
> > 2. The numbering can be fully-controlled.
> > Once the bugs are migrated to /some/ github repository, individual
> issues can then be "moved" between repositories, and github will
redirect
> from the movefrom-repository's bug to the target repository's bug.
> >
>
> This seems like a good approach to me.
>
> > We could also just have llvm.org/PR###
<http://llvm.org/PR#%23%23> <
> http://llvm.org/PR###> be the url only for legacy bugzilla issue numbers
> -- and have it use a file listing the mappings of bugzilla id -> github
id
> to generate the redirects. (GCC just did this recently for svn revision
> number redirections,
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2020-April/232030.html).
> >
>
> Would we even need a mapping file for this if we are able to get bugzilla
> id N
> to be archived to GitHub issue id N?
>
> -Tom
>
> > Then we could introduce a new naming scheme for github issue
shortlinks.
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 3:50 PM Richard Smith via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>>
wrote:
> >
> >     On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 12:31, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>>
wrote:
> >
> >         Hi,
> >
> >         I wanted to continue discussing the plan to migrate from
> Bugzilla to Github.
> >         It was suggested that I start a new thread and give a summary
of
> the proposal
> >         and what has changed since it was originally proposed in
October.
> >
> >         == Here is the original proposal:
> >
> >
> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-October/136162.html
> >
> >         == What has changed:
> >
> >         * You will be able to subscribe to notifications for a
specific
> issue
> >           labels.  We have a proof of concept notification system
using
> github actions
> >           that will be used for this.
> >
> >         * Emails will be sent to llvm-bugs when issues are opened or
> closed.
> >
> >         * We have the initial list of labels:
> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/labels
> >
> >         == Remaining issue:
> >
> >         * There is one remaining issue that I don't feel we have
> consensus on,
> >         and that is what to do with bugs in the existing bugzilla. 
Here
> are some options
> >         that we have discussed:
> >
> >         1. Switch to GitHub issues for new bugs only.  Bugs filed in
> bugzilla that are
> >         still active will be updated there until they are closed. 
This
> means that over
> >         time the number of active bugs in bugzilla will slowly
decrease
> as bugs are closed
> >         out.  Then at some point in the future, all of the bugs from
> bugzilla will be archived
> >         into their own GitHub repository that is separate from the
> llvm-project repo.
> >
> >         2. Same as 1, but also create a migration script that would
> allow anyone to
> >         manually migrate an active bug from bugzilla to a GitHub issue
> in the llvm-project
> >         repo.  The intention with this script is that it would be used
> to migrate high-traffic
> >         or important bugs from bugzilla to GitHub to help increase the
> visibility of the bug.
> >         This would not be used for mass migration of all the bugs.
> >
> >         3. Do a mass bug migration from bugzilla to GitHub and enable
> GitHub issues at the same time.
> >         Closed or inactive bugs would be archived into their own
GitHub
> repository, and active bugs
> >         would be migrated to the llvm-project repo.
> >
> >
> >     Can we preserve the existing bug numbers if we migrate this way?
> There are lots of references to "PRxxxxx" in checked in LLVM
artifacts and
> elsewhere in the world, as well as links to llvm.org/PRxxxxx <
> http://llvm.org/PRxxxxx>, and if we can preserve all the issue numbers
> this would ease the transition pain substantially.
> >
> >
> >         The key difference between proposal 1,2 and 3, is when bugs
will
> be archived from bugzilla
> >         to GitHub.  Delaying the archiving of bugs (proposals 1 and 2)
> means that we can migrate
> >         to GitHub issues sooner (within 1-2 weeks), whereas trying to
> archive bugs during the
> >         transition (proposal 3) will delay the transition for a while
> (likely several months)
> >         while we evaluate the various solutions for moving bugs from
> bugzilla to GitHub.
> >
> >
> >         The original proposal was to do 1 or 2, however there were
some
> concerns raised on the list
> >         that having 2 different places to search for bugs for some
> period of time would
> >         be very inconvenient.  So, I would like to restart this
> discussion and hopefully we can
> >         come to some kind of conclusion about the best way forward.
> >
> >         Thanks,
> >         Tom
> >
> >         _______________________________________________
> >         LLVM Developers mailing list
> >         llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org>
> >         https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> >
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     LLVM Developers mailing list
> >     llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org>
> >     https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200421/a3246473/attachment.html>

+1 to James's take

I'd prefer simplicity of implementation over perfection here.

Philip

On 4/20/20 4:08 PM, James Y Knight via llvm-dev wrote:
> In a previous discussion, one other suggestion had been to migrate all 
> the bugzilla bugs to a separate initially-private "bug archive" 
> repository in github. This has a few benefits:
> 1. If the migration is messed up, the repo can be deleted, and the 
> process run again, until we get a result we like.
> 2. The numbering can be fully-controlled.
> Once the bugs are migrated to /some/ github repository, individual 
> issues can then be "moved" between repositories, and github will 
> redirect from the movefrom-repository's bug to the target
repository's
> bug.
>
> We could also just have llvm.org/PR### <http://llvm.org/PR###> be the
> url only for legacy bugzilla issue numbers -- and have it use a file 
> listing the mappings of bugzilla id -> github id to generate the 
> redirects. (GCC just did this recently for svn revision number 
> redirections, https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2020-April/232030.html).
>
> Then we could introduce a new naming scheme for github issue shortlinks.
>
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 3:50 PM Richard Smith via llvm-dev 
> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>
>     On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 12:31, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev
>     <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>
>         Hi,
>
>         I wanted to continue discussing the plan to migrate from
>         Bugzilla to Github.
>         It was suggested that I start a new thread and give a summary
>         of the proposal
>         and what has changed since it was originally proposed in October.
>
>         == Here is the original proposal:
>
>         http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-October/136162.html
>
>         == What has changed:
>
>         * You will be able to subscribe to notifications for a
>         specific issue
>           labels.  We have a proof of concept notification system
>         using github actions
>           that will be used for this.
>
>         * Emails will be sent to llvm-bugs when issues are opened or
>         closed.
>
>         * We have the initial list of labels:
>         https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/labels
>
>         == Remaining issue:
>
>         * There is one remaining issue that I don't feel we have
>         consensus on,
>         and that is what to do with bugs in the existing bugzilla. 
>         Here are some options
>         that we have discussed:
>
>         1. Switch to GitHub issues for new bugs only.  Bugs filed in
>         bugzilla that are
>         still active will be updated there until they are closed. 
>         This means that over
>         time the number of active bugs in bugzilla will slowly
>         decrease as bugs are closed
>         out.  Then at some point in the future, all of the bugs from
>         bugzilla will be archived
>         into their own GitHub repository that is separate from the
>         llvm-project repo.
>
>         2. Same as 1, but also create a migration script that would
>         allow anyone to
>         manually migrate an active bug from bugzilla to a GitHub issue
>         in the llvm-project
>         repo.  The intention with this script is that it would be used
>         to migrate high-traffic
>         or important bugs from bugzilla to GitHub to help increase the
>         visibility of the bug.
>         This would not be used for mass migration of all the bugs.
>
>         3. Do a mass bug migration from bugzilla to GitHub and enable
>         GitHub issues at the same time.
>         Closed or inactive bugs would be archived into their own
>         GitHub repository, and active bugs
>         would be migrated to the llvm-project repo.
>
>
>     Can we preserve the existing bug numbers if we migrate this way?
>     There are lots of references to "PRxxxxx" in checked in LLVM
>     artifacts and elsewhere in the world, as well as links to
>     llvm.org/PRxxxxx <http://llvm.org/PRxxxxx>, and if we can
preserve
>     all the issue numbers this would ease the transition pain
>     substantially.
>
>         The key difference between proposal 1,2 and 3, is when bugs
>         will be archived from bugzilla
>         to GitHub.  Delaying the archiving of bugs (proposals 1 and 2)
>         means that we can migrate
>         to GitHub issues sooner (within 1-2 weeks), whereas trying to
>         archive bugs during the
>         transition (proposal 3) will delay the transition for a while
>         (likely several months)
>         while we evaluate the various solutions for moving bugs from
>         bugzilla to GitHub.
>
>
>         The original proposal was to do 1 or 2, however there were
>         some concerns raised on the list
>         that having 2 different places to search for bugs for some
>         period of time would
>         be very inconvenient.  So, I would like to restart this
>         discussion and hopefully we can
>         come to some kind of conclusion about the best way forward.
>
>         Thanks,
>         Tom
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         LLVM Developers mailing list
>         llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org>
>         https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     LLVM Developers mailing list
>     llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>     https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200421/255fbb6f/attachment.html>

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 at 11:04, Philip Reames via cfe-dev <
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> +1 to James's take
>
> I'd prefer simplicity of implementation over perfection here.
>
If we end up with two different bug numbering systems, that's a problem
that we will be paying for for many years. It's worth some investment now
to avoid that problem. And it doesn't seem like it really requires much
investment.

Here's another path we could take:

1) Fork the llvm repository to a private "bugs" repository. Mirror the
bugzilla issues there. Iterate until we're happy, as per James's
proposal.
2) Sync the forked repository to the llvm repository, delete the llvm
repository, rename "bugs" to "llvm", and make it public.

Then we'll have the first N bugs in llvm-project/llvm being *exactly* the
bugzilla bugs, and we'll have excised the existing github issues that we
want to pretend never existed anyway.


I think we've missed an important step in the planning here: we've not
agreed on a set of goals for the transition. Here are mine:

 * We end up with one single issue tracking system containing all issues,
both old and new, both open and closed.
 * All links and references to existing bugs still work.
 * We have a single bug numbering system covering all bugs, and old bugs
retain their numbers.

It sounds like we don't all agree that the last point is important, but if
we can achieve it without any significant additional cost, why not do so?
> Philip
> On 4/20/20 4:08 PM, James Y Knight via llvm-dev wrote:
>
> In a previous discussion, one other suggestion had been to migrate all the
> bugzilla bugs to a separate initially-private "bug archive"
repository in
> github. This has a few benefits:
> 1. If the migration is messed up, the repo can be deleted, and the process
> run again, until we get a result we like.
> 2. The numbering can be fully-controlled.
> Once the bugs are migrated to *some* github repository, individual issues
> can then be "moved" between repositories, and github will
redirect from the
> movefrom-repository's bug to the target repository's bug.
>
> We could also just have llvm.org/PR### <http://llvm.org/PR#%23%23> be
the
> url only for legacy bugzilla issue numbers -- and have it use a file
> listing the mappings of bugzilla id -> github id to generate the
redirects.
> (GCC just did this recently for svn revision number redirections,
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2020-April/232030.html).
>
> Then we could introduce a new naming scheme for github issue shortlinks.
>
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 3:50 PM Richard Smith via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 12:31, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev <
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I wanted to continue discussing the plan to migrate from Bugzilla
to
>>> Github.
>>> It was suggested that I start a new thread and give a summary of
the
>>> proposal
>>> and what has changed since it was originally proposed in October.
>>>
>>> == Here is the original proposal:
>>>
>>> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-October/136162.html
>>>
>>> == What has changed:
>>>
>>> * You will be able to subscribe to notifications for a specific
issue
>>>   labels.  We have a proof of concept notification system using
github
>>> actions
>>>   that will be used for this.
>>>
>>> * Emails will be sent to llvm-bugs when issues are opened or
closed.
>>>
>>> * We have the initial list of labels:
>>> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/labels
>>>
>>> == Remaining issue:
>>>
>>> * There is one remaining issue that I don't feel we have
consensus on,
>>> and that is what to do with bugs in the existing bugzilla.  Here
are
>>> some options
>>> that we have discussed:
>>>
>>> 1. Switch to GitHub issues for new bugs only.  Bugs filed in
bugzilla
>>> that are
>>> still active will be updated there until they are closed.  This
means
>>> that over
>>> time the number of active bugs in bugzilla will slowly decrease as
bugs
>>> are closed
>>> out.  Then at some point in the future, all of the bugs from
bugzilla
>>> will be archived
>>> into their own GitHub repository that is separate from the
llvm-project
>>> repo.
>>>
>>> 2. Same as 1, but also create a migration script that would allow
anyone
>>> to
>>> manually migrate an active bug from bugzilla to a GitHub issue in
the
>>> llvm-project
>>> repo.  The intention with this script is that it would be used to
>>> migrate high-traffic
>>> or important bugs from bugzilla to GitHub to help increase the
>>> visibility of the bug.
>>> This would not be used for mass migration of all the bugs.
>>>
>>> 3. Do a mass bug migration from bugzilla to GitHub and enable
GitHub
>>> issues at the same time.
>>> Closed or inactive bugs would be archived into their own GitHub
>>> repository, and active bugs
>>> would be migrated to the llvm-project repo.
>>>
>>
>> Can we preserve the existing bug numbers if we migrate this way? There
>> are lots of references to "PRxxxxx" in checked in LLVM
artifacts and
>> elsewhere in the world, as well as links to llvm.org/PRxxxxx, and if we
>> can preserve all the issue numbers this would ease the transition pain
>> substantially.
>>
>>
>>> The key difference between proposal 1,2 and 3, is when bugs will be
>>> archived from bugzilla
>>> to GitHub.  Delaying the archiving of bugs (proposals 1 and 2)
means
>>> that we can migrate
>>> to GitHub issues sooner (within 1-2 weeks), whereas trying to
archive
>>> bugs during the
>>> transition (proposal 3) will delay the transition for a while
(likely
>>> several months)
>>> while we evaluate the various solutions for moving bugs from
bugzilla to
>>> GitHub.
>>>
>>>
>>> The original proposal was to do 1 or 2, however there were some
concerns
>>> raised on the list
>>> that having 2 different places to search for bugs for some period
of
>>> time would
>>> be very inconvenient.  So, I would like to restart this discussion
and
>>> hopefully we can
>>> come to some kind of conclusion about the best way forward.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Tom
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing listllvm-dev at
lists.llvm.orghttps://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200421/b622ed5e/attachment.html>